Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rollup of 9 pull requests #107738

Merged
merged 23 commits into from
Feb 6, 2023
Merged

Rollup of 9 pull requests #107738

merged 23 commits into from
Feb 6, 2023

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

Nathan-Fenner and others added 23 commits January 23, 2023 13:37
Especially when trying to diagnose runaway future sizes, it might be
more intuitive to sort the variants according to the control flow
(aka their yield points) rather than the size of the variants.
"Round half-way cases" is a little confusing (it's a 'garden path
sentence' as it's not immediately clear whether round is an adjective
or verb).

Make this sentence longer and clearer.
…r-span-trait-impl, r=compiler-errors

Refine error spans for "The trait bound `T: Trait` is not satisfied" when passing literal structs/tuples

This PR adds a new heuristic which refines the error span reported for "`T: Trait` is not satisfied" errors, by "drilling down" into individual fields of structs/enums/tuples to point to the "problematic" value.

Here's a self-contained example of the difference in error span:

```rs
struct Burrito<Filling> {
    filling: Filling,
}
impl <Filling: Delicious> Delicious for Burrito<Filling> {}
fn eat_delicious_food<Food: Delicious>(food: Food) {}
fn will_type_error() {
    eat_delicious_food(Burrito { filling: Kale });
    //                 ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (before) The trait bound `Kale: Delicious` is not satisfied
    //                                    ^~~~   (after)  The trait bound `Kale: Delicious` is not satisfied
}
```
(kale is fine, this is just a silly food-based example)

Before this PR, the error span is identified as the entire argument to the generic function `eat_delicious_food`. However, since only `Kale` is the "problematic" part, we can point at it specifically. In particular, the primary error message itself mentions the missing `Kale: Delicious` trait bound, so it's much clearer if this part is called out explicitly.

---

The _existing_ heuristic tries to label the right function argument in `point_at_arg_if_possible`. It goes something like this:
- Look at the broken base trait `Food: Delicious` and find which generics it mentions (in this case, only `Food`)
- Look at the parameter type definitions and find which of them mention `Filling` (in this case, only `food`)
- If there is exactly one relevant parameter, label the corresponding argument with the error span, instead of the entire call

This PR extends this heuristic by further refining the resulting expression span in the new `point_at_specific_expr_if_possible` function. For each `impl` in the (broken) chain, we apply the following strategy:

The strategy to determine this span involves connecting information about our generic `impl`
with information about our (struct) type and the (struct) literal expression:
- Find the `impl` (`impl <Filling: Delicious> Delicious for Burrito<Filling>`)
  that links our obligation (`Kale: Delicious`) with the parent obligation (`Burrito<Kale>: Delicious`)
- Find the "original" predicate constraint in the impl (`Filling: Delicious`) which produced our obligation.
- Find all of the generics that are mentioned in the predicate (`Filling`).
- Examine the `Self` type in the `impl`, and see which of its type argument(s) mention any of those generics.
- Examing the definition for the `Self` type, and identify (for each of its variants) if there's a unique field
  which uses those generic arguments.
- If there is a unique field mentioning the "blameable" arguments, use that field for the error span.

Before we do any of this logic, we recursively call `point_at_specific_expr_if_possible` on the parent
obligation. Hence we refine the `expr` "outwards-in" and bail at the first kind of expression/impl we don't recognize.

This function returns a `Result<&Expr, &Expr>` - either way, it returns the `Expr` whose span should be
reported as an error. If it is `Ok`, then it means it refined successfull. If it is `Err`, then it may be
only a partial success - but it cannot be refined even further.

---

I added a new test file which exercises this new behavior. A few existing tests were affected, since their error spans are now different. In one case, this leads to a different code suggestion for the autofix - although the new suggestion isn't _wrong_, it is different from what used to be.

This change doesn't create any new errors or remove any existing ones, it just adjusts the spans where they're presented.

---

Some considerations: right now, this check occurs in addition to some similar logic in `adjust_fulfillment_error_for_expr_obligation` function, which tidies up various kinds of error spans (not just trait-fulfillment error). It's possible that this new code would be better integrated into that function (or another one) - but I haven't looked into this yet.

Although this code only occurs when there's a type error, it's definitely not as efficient as possible. In particular, there are definitely some cases where it degrades to quadratic performance (e.g. for a trait `impl` with 100+ generic parameters or 100 levels deep nesting of generic types). I'm not sure if these are realistic enough to worry about optimizing yet.

There's also still a lot of repetition in some of the logic, where the behavior for different types (namely, `struct` vs `enum` variant) is _similar_ but not the same.

---

I think the biggest win here is better targeting for tuples; in particular, if you're using tuples + traits to express variadic-like functions, the compiler can't tell you which part of a tuple has the wrong type, since the span will cover the entire argument. This change allows the individual field in the tuple to be highlighted, as in this example:

```
// NEW
LL |     want(Wrapper { value: (3, q) });
   |     ----                      ^ the trait `T3` is not implemented for `Q`

// OLD
LL |     want(Wrapper { value: (3, q) });
   |     ---- ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ the trait `T3` is not implemented for `Q`
```
Especially with large tuples, the existing error spans are not very effective at quickly narrowing down the source of the problem.
…imulacrum

Add nicer output to PGO build timer

This PR modifies the timer used in the PGO build script to contain nicer, hierarchical output of the individual build steps. It's not trivial to test locally, so I'll fire up a dist build right away.

r? ``@Mark-Simulacrum``
…r-errors

Sort Generator `print-type-sizes` according to their yield points

Especially when trying to diagnose runaway future sizes, it might be more intuitive to sort the variants according to the control flow (aka their yield points) rather than the size of the variants.
Clarify wording on f64::round() and f32::round()

"Round half-way cases" is a little confusing (it's a 'garden path sentence' as it's not immediately clear whether round is an adjective or verb).

Make this sentence longer and clearer.
…acrum

end entry paragraph with a period (.)
…c-into-struct, r=notriddle

Turn MarkdownWithToc into a struct with named fields

Extracted the commit from rust-lang#107640.

r? `@notriddle`
…=cjgillot

interpret: move discriminant reading and writing to separate file

This is quite different from the otherwise fairly general read and write functions in place.rs and operand.rs, and also it's nice to have these two functions close together as they are basically inverses of each other.
…=dtolnay

Add mailmap for commits made by xes@meta.com

Saw my contributions split at https://thanks.rust-lang.org/rust/1.69.0/

I assume it's because I committed with my work and personal email?
@rustbot rustbot added A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself A-query-system Area: The rustc query system (https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/query.html) A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Feb 6, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Feb 6, 2023
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=9

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 6, 2023

📌 Commit 5e95829 has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 6, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 6, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 5e95829 with merge e1eaa2d...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 6, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing e1eaa2d to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Feb 6, 2023
@bors bors merged commit e1eaa2d into rust-lang:master Feb 6, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.69.0 milestone Feb 6, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (e1eaa2d): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.6% [2.6%, 2.6%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.6% [2.6%, 2.6%] 1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself A-query-system Area: The rustc query system (https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/query.html) A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.